I compared the Jupiter with Arcam, my existing CAL two box system, and some higher priced Sony units at the time. Like the Rega turntables the Jupiter has a way of conveying the feel of music. The sound is full in the mid to lower bands with a great amount of smooth detail. The highs are clear and natural on 95% of the CD's I listen to. Some CD releases are just hopelessly bright or dull, and if one were to tune a system to make them passable, all the other recordings turn to mud or steel.

This is NOT a very good CD player. I am the ex owner of Planet, Planet 2000, Jupiter 2000 and I have also concurent equimpent like QUAD CD-P, Primare DVD30, Denon 2900, Sony SACD EX777, and Denon 2910.

Planet 2000 is a good player for reasonable amount of money. But, Jupiter 2000 is simply too expensive for what it gives as a sound and it is not better comparing to any of before mentioned players.

There's NO significant improvmenet comparing to Planet 2000 in any sens. If you are an owner of Planet and you are looking for something better, then just change the manufacturer. For 1900 euros you'll find a better CD player and even a nice SACD or universal player on the market which sounds better !

Firstly I agree with much of what the previous reviewer says about the Jupiter 2000, a well done review. I had an Arcam CD23 stolen. It is no longer made, so to replace it I auditioned the Arcam CD33 and the Rega Jupiter. Differences between digital sources are more subtle than comparing other components, but they are apparent. I did'nt like the CD33 as well as the CD23 (if you ask me Arcam should have stuck with their exclusive "Ring" DAC technology instead of "upsampling"). Guess I'm not a huge fan of "upsampling", it does add more detail and dimension, but seems to strip the music dry. Both the Rega Jupiter 2000 and the Arcam CD 33 use 24 bit DAC's made by Wolfson microelectronics. The Arcam uses "upsampling", the Rega does not. On audition the Arcam had more air and "hall sound", the Rega Jupiter had better sound of the instruments and better dynamics. Each machine had very good detail, with the Rega coming across in a less obvious way. While both machines were revealing of lesser recordings, the Arcam made them sound really bad. My thinking was, do I want a machine which will render half my cd colection useless? To its credit, the Arcam was more open and 3D than the Rega. The very top end of the rega is tipped down a bit and so was somewhat shut in by comparison, the plus side of this was less digital garbage in the signal. The Rega had deeper, fuller and tight bass as well, maybe a tad overblown by comparison to the Arcam. Although the Rega is $750 dollars less, I thought it had better overall build quality, and the no drawer design appealed to me. I think the way the machine grips the disc is partly responsible for the foundation it puts under the music. The downside being since the transport is externally exposed, on some discs you can hear it turning louder than other machines I have used. As far as comments about the rega puck "wobble", pull the cover off any cd machine, play a disc, and you will see the same "wobble". In the end it was two things that really made me walk away with the Rega - the sense of scale it gave to classical symphony and piano concerto recordings was closer to what I hear at the Myerhoff symphony Hall. The Jupiter was very impressive in this respect. And the way John Coltrane's horn sounded through it, full and dynamic like live music. On the Arcam, his horn sounded dry. Both machines were ok with classic rock, but the CD33 was a bit hashy (to be fair it was only revealing the top end hash present on the majority of rock recordings). The Rega stomps the Arcam with classic jazz (trane, miles etc.). Both were very good with classical, with the Arcam having more ambient hall sound, while the Rega had an incredible sense of scale, everything seeming large as life. To sum up, I'd say that if 3D imaging is your main priority, you'll like the Arcam. If a slightly rich dynamic sound similar to live music appeals to you, you'll like the Rega Jupiter. This is not to say the Rega does not do soundstaging, it has great depth and wide also with good seperation of each instrument. Its main, and I'd say its only shortcoming is a slight lack of ambience and "air". That is what I miss most from the Arcam CD23 I had. I felt I had to choose a machine that would be enjoyable for the long haul, the Rega Jupiter is a machine I am happy to own. I'd say Rega's description of it's product is accurate- "the Jupiter has a unique design direction necessary to reproduce a musical sound from a digital source of information". Though the Jupiter 2000 is now a 4 year old model, it is still one of the better machines out there. I'd give it a listen if you are considering a player at this price (or even higher).

I work in the sound industry and have hear allot of players of late.
I took the MKIII Jupiter player home on demo and listened to it in both HiFi system and Studio headphone situations.
The first listening impression is of a lean sound with plenty of good quality bass drive.The top end was smooth and closed in.Some would call this player to have polite sound.listen longer (at least 2 hours on) now everything has warmed up and nested in.The sound changes and starts to become very musical and involving.The tops are smooth and a bit more prominent than before.
It's "together" sound. All the rich harmonics of many instruments are portayed very nicely (on good recordings of coarse).I don't hear every backgroud detail on orchestral recordings as I do with other higher priced players out there, but what is there is very cultured and real and keeps you interested.
The other similar priced players that claim to have more so called "detail" are really too aggressive and two dismentional to my ears.Good at first but later a bit boring and stark.The Jupiter sound keeps you locked in wanting more, even after 3-4 hours.It's a bang for buck player.I think you would need to spend allot more on a Digital player to get more "real" 3 dismentional, detailed playback, but then it gets silly and you have to constantly remind yourself that you have "well spent" that extra cash every time you listen to your gear don't you!.Personally I cannot justify the extra money above this price level for a Digital source. If you want more sound in a source then I'd recommend to go to black viynal.It still wins hands down over all the Digital formats even in 2003! But if you want a good Digital player in this price range...